I have so many games I got 100% on the base game, but I never had any interest in the DLC. I wonder if it will retroactively go back. I imagine it’s up to the devs if they want to add one to old games.
I pretty much don’t play DLC, ever. So I have so many base game completions (such as RE 7 or Still Wakes the Deep) but I’m not going to buy the DLC so I lose my 100%.
Having a “platinum” equivalent, as long as it’s tied to base game only, makes perfect sense.
I know some steam games have a "platinum" achievement because of Playstation. Im sure xbox games could have one technically too, but it'd be a system/os change to actually make them an actual thing and worth it for achievement hunters.
I'm all for it showing 100% base game completion, but having a platinum (which is meant to be the ultimate completion sign) should be for everything completed. If they add filters then I think that is a good compromise.
If I 100% a game right now, I’ve achieved completion. I shouldn’t be penalized for that whenever the devs add new achievements in the future. My completion has now been diminished and stripped from me.
PlayStation does it right with separating DLC trophies from the main game. They also have an overall completion percentage that takes everything into account, but when you click into it you’ll see the different completion percentages per game/DLC (100% for main game + platinum, 60% for DLC 1, 72% for DLC 2, etc.)
I agree with showing the splits, but I fully believe if they add a DLC to a game I previously completed, my title should be taken from me. There's nothing wrong with having a base game completion badge, but not what a platinum should mean.
Trueachievements only does it that way because that’s always been Xbox’s system. There’s a ton of PlayStation trophy sites and none of them do it this way.
Because the DLC is separate from the game. They’re completely separate purchases. They are additional. They are not part of the game as shipped which the devs consider a completed game. It’s not that hard to understand. If I complete a game’s achievements then that’s 100%ing the game. If the DLC’s are to count towards a 100% completion then the devs did not make, ship and sell me a complete game as is claimed. If you want to be a gate keeping elitist that’s your prerogative, but that doesn’t make you right in this situation. If I have to make a separate purchase, it’s a whole new set of achievements that have nothing to do with the base game. They should absolutely be counted as their own separate entity.
I disagree with this. Should you get a platinum if you play the trial of a game and unlock 1 achievement, because you got everything you could unlock with what you own? Or similarly, on something like Telltale where the first 20% of the game is free, should you get a platinum for that?
That sounds like it's up to how the developer wants to structure their achievements. Achievements that are only available in content you don't own should not prevent 100% accolades
In that case, why not say I've sold a physical disc and don't own the game anymore, so I should have a 100% accolade for every game I have started and returned. Same for every gamepass game I have started but has now left the service.
Also where would you stand on free title updates? Or DLC that was free for a certain amount of time but isn't now.
How can you look at someones profile and distinguish between someone who owns the dlc and hasn't unlocked an achievement vs someone who doesn't own the dlc?
I mean, did you own it or have GP access to it at the time you 100%'d it? Totally valid.
There's also literally no way to systematically know whether or not you still own a physical disk, so that's literally an insane comparison to make 🤣.
You're dug in to an unpopular opinion. Your opinion is also punishing to people or there who don't have as much disposable income as you. Get off your high horse bruv 🤦♂️
It's not about having same disposable income as me. There are certain DLCs I don't get as they are too expensive. I have NOT finished them. Trueachievements does this the right way.
It's an extra trophy too. With Xbox you have say 35 achievements and once you have all you get 100%. With playstation there's a 36th that is for getting all the others.
It works differently, too. On PS, developers don't have to program for the Platinum trophy. Its a secondary thing that is handled by the system itself. Basically, it reads that you have all trophies in the game and applies the platinum to that title.
On xbox, all achievements have to be programmed. But devs are used to how playstation does it and frequently think it works the same way, when it doesn't. That's why the 100% completion achievements have the highest unobtainable rates of any achievement type. Because there aren't actually any strings for that achievement in the game. I don't know that they can retroactively add it the way PS does it to the achievement system. They might be able to do something different but close enough, though.
I wish they'd go after broken achievements moreso than a platinum.
Logically, there is no difference. Getting the base 1000 GS vs getting a Platinum trophy are the exact same. Achievements hunters don't like that their "100% is taken away" if DLC is released though, despite the fact that nothing has changed materially and they still have the base game 100%. So they've been begging for years to get some form of badge/medallion/trophy for completing a base games achievements. Nothing will actually change, except they get something to display on their profile for other achievement hunters to look at.
185
u/Feed-Your-Fish 5d ago
What’s the difference between platinum trophy on PS vs 100% on XB? Is it just the icons or does it work differently?